Comp for 9mm pcc
- Thread starter icecold
- Start date
I absolutely agree that not all compensators are created equal. But that doesn't mean that any of them actually work as compensators on longer barreled PCCs.
Since none of us have the math required, until you try compensator vs. passive muzzle weight side by side, you'd never really know.
Your point about recoil is also very relevant - Aside from the physics of different rifle designs and shapes and different ammunition types, shooter grip and posture has a huge effect.
Me neither. There's got to be some effect, but I think it has been established that on longer barrels with pistol cartridges, the effect is negligible.
You'd think that the makers of compensators could provide that kind of information, since you'd think it would be their business to work with the math involved.
well, if it helps i am engineer and we are allowed to disagree. to start, high bore axis and reciprocating mass are actually two issues (albeit related). ie you can have the high bore axis on a revolver cause muzzle flip without any reciprocating mass, hence the efforts to move beavertails as high as possible. and i get that the reciprocating mass striking the stop will turn flip into recoil, but until it happens the mass is still reciprocating and the gun is still flipping. in part why i shoot heavy flat bullets with slow powder - slows everything down, turns the snap (flip) into a push.
the radium king: The reciprocating mass you speak of is the slide and barrel of the pistol. All pistols that I am aware of have a slide stop located just above the frame. This is the contact point for the slide. The gentleman who wrote the article rested his argument and calculations on that fact. If I can find his post I will copy it here.
The 1911 has been around for 113 years. It is worth noting that up until at least the 1960's nobody spoke about the pitfalls of a high bore axis of the 1911. Are you aware that the slide on pistols does not fully unlock until the bullet leaves the barrel. The delay is measurable and if I recall had a role in all of this.
Beavertails on pistols, at the time they became popular, was driven by slide bite that occurred when folks with big meaty hands shot the then popular 1911's. It had nothing to.do with the topic of high bore axis that became popular in the1960's with marketing folks. Beavertails are wider and protect the webbing of your hand but, at least on the 1911 did not really bring the hand higher on the grip . The rearward movement of the slide limits how high the beavertail can be as you know.
You might want to look at your comment regarding revolvers. I don't know what you are saying. The grip of modern revolvers are designed now to attempt to reduce muzzle rise and spread the affect of recoil on the shooters hand.. The SAA revolvers have a grip that encourages muzzle flip when shooting heavy loads. While it doesn't encourage fast shooting it does tend to mitigate felt recoil. The revolvers I own all have relatively low bore axes. Low in relation to the webbing of hand. The barrels all rise when the gun fires. The old 44mag I passed on to my youngest enjoyed "combat grips" which helped with the affects of recoil but the gun was still hurtful.
All that aside the question is whether the high or low bore axis has any real affect on muzzle rise in pistols. From my personal experience, augmented by the information contained in the paper I read tells me there is more marketing than physics involved in the claims regarding high or low bore axis.
Take Care
Bob
The 1911 has been around for 113 years. It is worth noting that up until at least the 1960's nobody spoke about the pitfalls of a high bore axis of the 1911. Are you aware that the slide on pistols does not fully unlock until the bullet leaves the barrel. The delay is measurable and if I recall had a role in all of this.
Beavertails on pistols, at the time they became popular, was driven by slide bite that occurred when folks with big meaty hands shot the then popular 1911's. It had nothing to.do with the topic of high bore axis that became popular in the1960's with marketing folks. Beavertails are wider and protect the webbing of your hand but, at least on the 1911 did not really bring the hand higher on the grip . The rearward movement of the slide limits how high the beavertail can be as you know.
You might want to look at your comment regarding revolvers. I don't know what you are saying. The grip of modern revolvers are designed now to attempt to reduce muzzle rise and spread the affect of recoil on the shooters hand.. The SAA revolvers have a grip that encourages muzzle flip when shooting heavy loads. While it doesn't encourage fast shooting it does tend to mitigate felt recoil. The revolvers I own all have relatively low bore axes. Low in relation to the webbing of hand. The barrels all rise when the gun fires. The old 44mag I passed on to my youngest enjoyed "combat grips" which helped with the affects of recoil but the gun was still hurtful.
All that aside the question is whether the high or low bore axis has any real affect on muzzle rise in pistols. From my personal experience, augmented by the information contained in the paper I read tells me there is more marketing than physics involved in the claims regarding high or low bore axis.
Take Care
Bob
Amping we all know that Gas pressures decline after a certain barrel length. I have read where the 9mm cartridge maxs out at around 10 to 11 inches then begins to decline. My Raven9 without the TK comp rises more without the comp. I know this because I have shot the gun with and without the comp'
That's my experience. I'm not sure how you measure "significant". If you are stronger than a bull you might describe it insignificant while a shooter with less strength might say wow. What I do know is when I shoot at and IDPA target I describe the affect of the comp as wow. The muzzle must rise a bit but in practical turns it doesn't. If you never have shot a PCC it is easy to do the math and conclude the Comps won't work with 18.5" barrels. Watch videos of the top PCC shooters and their carbines, usually with 16.5 " barrels never rise without a comp!
That is not my experience but I am not 30 nor much of a shooter either. If you own a 18.5" barreled PCC and you do experience muzzle rise. Spend $100 on a the TK or DaVinci comp. Hell you will spend more than that on a new buttstock, or the latest competition trigger group or red dot sight or super dooper grip. After you spend the money, you can tell all your friends and wife how much each helps your performance. My Raven9 shoots way better with my TK comp and my scores are way better as well....and my Tacoma gets 40 miles per gallon and Trump never lies.
Alping thr manufactures do make Comps for the 9MM carbines and they have done the math. Their primary market lies in the US where 16.5" barreled AR's are probably the most popular. The US has laws restricting the use of barrels less than 16.5" unless you pay for a Fed. stamp and lots of average guys shooting PCC just go with 16.5" carbines cuz in the main they are less expensive or work better or ...
If you experience some level of muzzle rise you may found as I did that there is enough gas pressure left in the gun to level the barrel while I am shooting. It does, I am sorry. If you are considerable weaker than I or less experienced shooter you may find your barrel still jumps up or stronger than I and you find no difference. Personally if you are contemplating jumping down the rabbit hole called PCC shooting spending money on a decent comp will be just the thing. Believe me you will spend more than the cost of a comp on items that will help you less.
Take Care
Bob
ps I also have a 10" and 18.5" barreled FX9. Both shoot flat with the comp installed. Neither shoots flat without the comp. The longer barrel also benefits from the weight of the longer barrel so that weight helps mitigate the rise as well. That said without the comp there is no discernable difference in muzzle rise even though the shorter barreled upper should rise more with less forward weight. There is no practical difference when I am shooting.
That's my experience. I'm not sure how you measure "significant". If you are stronger than a bull you might describe it insignificant while a shooter with less strength might say wow. What I do know is when I shoot at and IDPA target I describe the affect of the comp as wow. The muzzle must rise a bit but in practical turns it doesn't. If you never have shot a PCC it is easy to do the math and conclude the Comps won't work with 18.5" barrels. Watch videos of the top PCC shooters and their carbines, usually with 16.5 " barrels never rise without a comp!
That is not my experience but I am not 30 nor much of a shooter either. If you own a 18.5" barreled PCC and you do experience muzzle rise. Spend $100 on a the TK or DaVinci comp. Hell you will spend more than that on a new buttstock, or the latest competition trigger group or red dot sight or super dooper grip. After you spend the money, you can tell all your friends and wife how much each helps your performance. My Raven9 shoots way better with my TK comp and my scores are way better as well....and my Tacoma gets 40 miles per gallon and Trump never lies.
Alping thr manufactures do make Comps for the 9MM carbines and they have done the math. Their primary market lies in the US where 16.5" barreled AR's are probably the most popular. The US has laws restricting the use of barrels less than 16.5" unless you pay for a Fed. stamp and lots of average guys shooting PCC just go with 16.5" carbines cuz in the main they are less expensive or work better or ...
If you experience some level of muzzle rise you may found as I did that there is enough gas pressure left in the gun to level the barrel while I am shooting. It does, I am sorry. If you are considerable weaker than I or less experienced shooter you may find your barrel still jumps up or stronger than I and you find no difference. Personally if you are contemplating jumping down the rabbit hole called PCC shooting spending money on a decent comp will be just the thing. Believe me you will spend more than the cost of a comp on items that will help you less.
Take Care
Bob
ps I also have a 10" and 18.5" barreled FX9. Both shoot flat with the comp installed. Neither shoots flat without the comp. The longer barrel also benefits from the weight of the longer barrel so that weight helps mitigate the rise as well. That said without the comp there is no discernable difference in muzzle rise even though the shorter barreled upper should rise more with less forward weight. There is no practical difference when I am shooting.
I have bought a heavily advertised Mcarbo muzzle device. Probably, I've just wasted money on a fancy unnecessary accessory. I don't really think I need anything like this for S&W FPC, considering the caliber and my questionable shooting skills
Come on guy you know you will....come on get the card out..LOL Why should you be different then the rest of us Vogel wannabees.
From the pics the McCarbo comp exits gas off to the side, it may work a bit as a brake but it wont reduce muzzle jump. Go shoot the gun and see if it reduces felt recoil. If it does then you have not wasted your money. The S&W you are looking at will replace the Sub2k. For what it is, a folding back packer the Smith looks like a better buy the the Sub2k.
Take Care
Bob
i understand the role of a beavertail. i stated that they are moving them higher in order to get the grip closer to the bore axis. its physics. take a box. push one way on the top of the box (the recoil path along the bore axis) push the opposite direction on the bottom of the box (your grip, the stock on your rifle). the box will try to rotate - this is flip (technically, the box will try to rotate around a moment arm between the two places where the force is acting on it).
having the slide/bolt move to a stop at the back of the firearm just shortens this moment arm and increases the effect. it is indifferent to when the slide unlocks. again physics - think tetter-totter - go to the park and sit in the middle of one then run to one end - the other end flips up.
can you control this with grip? sure. but it is faster if you can minimise the effect. matches are won/lost by fractions of a second. lighter slides, lighter bolts/carriers, higher beavertails, straight stocks, compensators.
look at the latest 2011 race pistols - higher/narrow beavertails, pinned/filed grip safeties to allow for an even higher grip, front 'serrations' which are really weight relief trying to game the regs. and these are not changes made by vendors trying to upsell their product, but rather things that gamers have done for years getting picked up by the vendors that sell fast guns.
having the slide/bolt move to a stop at the back of the firearm just shortens this moment arm and increases the effect. it is indifferent to when the slide unlocks. again physics - think tetter-totter - go to the park and sit in the middle of one then run to one end - the other end flips up.
can you control this with grip? sure. but it is faster if you can minimise the effect. matches are won/lost by fractions of a second. lighter slides, lighter bolts/carriers, higher beavertails, straight stocks, compensators.
look at the latest 2011 race pistols - higher/narrow beavertails, pinned/filed grip safeties to allow for an even higher grip, front 'serrations' which are really weight relief trying to game the regs. and these are not changes made by vendors trying to upsell their product, but rather things that gamers have done for years getting picked up by the vendors that sell fast guns.
the radium King you understand you are limited to how high you can make the beavertail before the slide will hit it, right? I have two 1911's. One has a large beavertail that protects my webbing of my right hand by being wider. The older GI model beavetail is thinner allowing the hammer to pinch my webbing of my hand if I get to aggressive with my grip. The newer version of a beaver tail is the same height as the older version it just is wider preventing the hammer from pinching the webbing on my hand. Again slide and/or hammer bite were the driving issues for the beavertail revolution in pistol design, think 1911 and some other hammer fired pistols.
Some manufactures undercut the grip behind he trigger guard to allow the fingers to ride higher in the frame which helps the shooter to control the rising barrel. I am thinking of the Shadow11 and Tanfoglio Stock3.
Most of the 9MM guns now don't have any form of beavertail. Some have the slide ride deeper than the grip which allows the hand to ride under the slide eg Walther PPQ's for example. The webbing of my hand is about the same level as the slide stop or about the same relative place where my webbing sits relative to the Sig 320 which incidentally has a high bore access just like the Sig 226 which also has a high bore axis. Both shoot the same as my CZ Shadowline with its low bore axis. The CZ slide stop is in the same position relative to my webbing between my thumb and forefinger as the Sigs. Coincidence?
Go figure.
Take Care
Bob
Some manufactures undercut the grip behind he trigger guard to allow the fingers to ride higher in the frame which helps the shooter to control the rising barrel. I am thinking of the Shadow11 and Tanfoglio Stock3.
Most of the 9MM guns now don't have any form of beavertail. Some have the slide ride deeper than the grip which allows the hand to ride under the slide eg Walther PPQ's for example. The webbing of my hand is about the same level as the slide stop or about the same relative place where my webbing sits relative to the Sig 320 which incidentally has a high bore access just like the Sig 226 which also has a high bore axis. Both shoot the same as my CZ Shadowline with its low bore axis. The CZ slide stop is in the same position relative to my webbing between my thumb and forefinger as the Sigs. Coincidence?
Go figure.
Take Care
Bob
Any firearm that experiences muzzle rise under recoil will have less muzzle rise with a weight attached to the muzzle. Nobody will argue with that. The issue is whether or not the compensator reduces the muzzle rise more than an equivalent dead weight attached to the muzzle.
Honestly, I thought it was common knowledge: I'm not the first person to say that compensators on long barrel PCCs don't work as compensators, just have a look at the many, many threads on the topic on other forums. There, the consensus seems to be that compensators work great as passive muzzle weights, since there's no better way to attach weight to the muzzle. But while any additional weight at the muzzle helps to dampen muzzle rise under recoil, it also slows down transitions between targets, so there is no free lunch. Not to mention the overall length is increased with a compensator, reducing maneuverability.
I really don't mind if you or anyone else wants to spend your shooting budget on a compensator. Go nuts, have fun. But it's a simple test if you want some objective data: Time your on-target splits with the comp, and time them with an equivalent passive weight attached to the muzzle. It's tough to do it properly "blind" so that you don't get confirmation bias, but if you try to be fair, and use a shot timer, you can get some real data. It's either a statistically significant difference, or it's not (a large enough sample size will tell you one way or the other), not a subjective determination of "significant".
Sure, manufacturers of 9mm compensators have done the math, but it's been done in the marketing department. It seems like they have determined that they will sell more compensators if they don't publish any real numbers about how well their products work. If one design actually worked better than another, I'd expect that manufacturer be shouting it from the rooftops.
You're absolutely right that you can spend lots of money on lots of things that don't help much. For a straight blowback PCC, in terms of making them flatter shooting, the smartest money is spent on tweaking the reciprocating mass (and maybe spring weights), and handloading. Well, maybe the real smartest money for lots of people would probably be just taking the time to watch some free videos demonstrating good technique, and then practicing?
All things being equal:
A compensator weighs X ounces, and produces Y ounces of force pushing the muzzle down at the point when the projectile leaves the barrel.
A dead weight pushes X+Y ounces of force down on the muzzle, all the time.
Why would you want to lug around the "Y" dead weight, when you can apply downward force only in the microsecond where you need it?
Jeez guys my TK comp only weighs 3oz. Do you folks really believe that weight makes a difference? If you don't want to use a comp.on your 18.5" barrel don't. I do and I will. I know I can manage the extra 3oz of weight.
Bubba you are to logical.
Bubba you are to logical.
Last edited:
AlphaCharlieDelta
Member
- Location
- The Wet Coast
I've shot mine with out, shot it with a couple different comps, and in my testing the comps do make a difference, all be it a small difference at 18.7", the shorter the barrel the more they work.
I shoot a 16.1" barrel and without the comp I get dot bounce, with the comp no dot bounce. So based on testing, they work.
If you want to really get maximum benefit try using a slow burning powder in a 18.7 with a comp to maximize the compression thus maximizing the gases the compensator uses.
Most handgun powders are fast burning for shorter barrels and won't create enough compression to really get maximum benefit.
Another added effect of a comp is in competition the report from a PCC sometimes doesn't register on the timers, so a comp can help your shots register... Reshoots because of a missed last shot can get expensive
I shoot a 16.1" barrel and without the comp I get dot bounce, with the comp no dot bounce. So based on testing, they work.
If you want to really get maximum benefit try using a slow burning powder in a 18.7 with a comp to maximize the compression thus maximizing the gases the compensator uses.
Most handgun powders are fast burning for shorter barrels and won't create enough compression to really get maximum benefit.
Another added effect of a comp is in competition the report from a PCC sometimes doesn't register on the timers, so a comp can help your shots register... Reshoots because of a missed last shot can get expensive
This is a fair logical reduction but does assume that "Y" is dead weight rather than useful weight. Whereas finding something useful to add upfront is easy and may even add additional muzzle rise mitigation benefit in its own right (e.g. foregrip, gas pedal, etc).
Regardless, if we extend the equation ... a compensator is a muzzle device and, by definition, beyond the barrel (by "Z" inches).
Which is more cumbersome: "X+Z", "X+Y"? Are "X", "Y" or "Z" worthwhile at all? Which yields best results when timed, per shooter, per firearm, per load, per challenge?
With all the choices, I like how my 9mm compensator is added or removed with a few turns!
Picking up Alpha Charlie Delta alluded to I am going to try CFE Pistol on Thursday. I picked up 5 lbs of it recently on sale. It's not the slowest powder I could use but it is slower than some of the powders I have used up until now. I doubt I will see a major difference but I might well be surprised. CFE Pistol will keep copper fouling at bay, just an additional benefit.
Take Care
Bob
Take Care
Bob
I think you're saying that a compensator is superior to an equivalent dead weight, right? This is true if the comp is actually working as a comp. When it doesn't (like with long barrel PCCs), then it's just an expensive dead weight that adds to overall length.
I do, why do you ask?
Have you tried firing your comped PCCs with an equivalent dead weight attached to the muzzle?
In reading probably dozens of threads on the topic all over the internet (particularly on more competition-focused sites like Brian Enos), I've never come across any evidence that compensators work better than equivalent dead weights attached to the muzzle for long barreled PCCs. There are lots of reports of "rifle shoots flatter with a comp vs. without a comp", just like your observations (and others) in this thread, but that's not the same thing.
Lots of people are happy with their comps, and that's great. If reducing muzzle climb is the goal, adding any dead weight at the muzzle is one of the easiest solutions - As far as I know there's currently no better way to do this than attaching a comp (or any other weighty muzzle device).
The most common advice on compensator selection seems to be to pick a comp that you like the price and the look of, because functionally you won't see a difference in performance between the different designs (aside from the passive effect of greater or less mass in the unit).
